Celeste Ng's Little Fires Everywhere

I wasn't a huge fan of "Everything I Never Told You," so I had no real interest in Celeste's sophomore effort. However, it's the selection of the LeMoyne Library Book Club, so I need to read it.

I ultimately found the book quite a frustrating experience - after finding it compelling and well written, the ending pretty much ruined it for me. As with many celebrated books, I did not enjoy it anywhere as much as the hype suggested I should.

Anyway, back to the ending. The author inserted so many contrivances to make things work out the way she wanted. For example, where did an impoverished Bebe get money for a *last minute* plane ticket to China (does she even have a passport)? And how did Izzy just happen to be going through her mother's papers so that she conveniently had information for Mia, like her parent's address?

I also thought that many of the characters' behavior was really unrealistic. After spending the entire book settling into Shaker Heights and developing really strong relationships with many of the people there (especially her first boyfriend, Trip), Pearl is perfectly happy to walk away from it all and leave with her mother. AND she isn't upset AT ALL to find out that she has a dad and grandparents that her mother never told her about. Okaaay. I have a teenage daughter and she shows more outrage when I'm late picking her up from a friend's house. I get that Mia and Pearl have a strong bond, but come on, Pearl is still a teenager.

Sadly, I don't think that Izzy will last 6 weeks out on her own. She's what, 15 years old, and grew up in the lap of luxury. She's got a lot of attitude, but that doesn't pay the bills and it certainly doesn't keep you safe "on the road." I shudder to think where she will end up, despite the author setting it up for her to reconnect with the virtuous Mia.

Obviously, I don't share other readers' deification of her character. I thought her photographs of the Richardson family members was the ultimate contrivance. I found her to be an incredibly selfish person who had ditched every relationship in her life once it served her purpose (including her parents, her art school mentor, her kind California landlord, and, of course, the Ryans). But the reader is supposed to believe that she has preternatural insight into the very ESSENCE of these people who she barely knows. I'm not buying that even a little bit. It felt like a really fake but also blatant ploy to bolster affection for Mia. (NOTE that I found myself thinking of the ending of White Oleander, where the artist, Astrid, makes a "box" which represents her relationship with each of the "mothers" in her life.)

I also thought that evoking the infamous Baby M case was so interesting - like, what would happen if Mary Beth Whitehead was actually a cool artist and she never got caught after she kidnapped the baby. However, the author wants to rewrite the story and alter the reader's allegiances. That didn't work for me. I was completely disgusted with Mia from the moment her deception was revealed and, as a reader, I really resented that she not only got away scot free, but the author attempts to manipulate our sympathies so that we cheer Mia on at every turn. Clearly, from the reviews I have read, she was mostly successful in this. Mrs Richardson, the rule follower, the dark yin to Mia's passionate yang, is the bad guy of the piece. If Mrs Richardson is such a troll, why did the author bother to linger on Pearl's fascination with all the Richardsons - the mom as well as the children who she raised to have such enthralling amounts of confidence?

A more interesting and nuanced novel would consider the perspectives of all the characters with equal sympathy, forcing the reader to reexamine their own biases, rather than using the situations to reinforce a pretty tired cliche about the unappreciated value of free spirits.

49 Muslims killed in New Zealand

By Molly Crabapple

Beto is for "vapid morons"

A friend asked for responses to this article, highly critical of Beto O'Rourke. Here's the first few paragraphs:

     In 2008, I was swept up in the energy surrounding Barack Obama's campaign. I volunteered at phone banks, I gave money, I heroically posted on the Internet, etc. etc. I was 25 years old, and I believed in Obama the transformational figure, and believed in the Great Man theory of systemic change. I believed, in short, that Obama could bend history to his will, and each time he talked about reaching across the aisle and working with Republicans, I envisioned a future in which, like me, those Republican congressmen would find him irresistible, bow to his political talents, and, well…get things done, or something.
     Of course, we know what happened. Obama had two years with a stacked Democratic Congress, and the most he accomplished was to institute a healthcare system that was barely adequate to survive the first real GOP onslaught, and that was utterly inadequate at resolving a staggering crisis in America. Republicans heard his pitch about pragmatism and compromise, and spit in his face just before going into an obstructionist crouch that lasted eight years.
     But instead of immediately shifting to war footing in response, Obama and his team spent those eight years continuing to believe in the original idea of West Wing-style triumphalism, and what they did manage to accomplish was pretty horrific—deportations, drone strikes against U.S. citizens, a massive bailout and subsequent lack of prosecution for the criminals of the economic crisis. 

Here's my reply:

I totally get what the writer is saying, I do. Obama was appealing as a campaigner, but not always bold in his adminstration. 

That being said, as much as we seem to have forgotten it, the American governing model is built on compromise. That is literally the Founder's vision. And it assumes disagreement and conflict. It assumes that the middle is the only way forward. 

For all this writer dismisses the entire 8 years of the Obama administration as getting "nothing" done, that could not be farther from the truth. Gay marriage is legal throughout this country. You don't have to give Obama credit for that, but it happened while he was in office. We are having a serious cultural conversation about criminal justice reform which Obama helped to start. Our economy is humming along, our car industry is healthy. Bin Laden is dead. These things are not nothing. 

With Obama, and frankly, with Trump, we have ample evidence of how important it is to have a charismatic leader for voters to rally around. The policies that a candidate embraces during their campaign will not all be adopted. What many people vote for is an avatar, a representation of what they want the country to be.

Another issue is that not all Democrats want the policies that this writer mentions, such as free college and the Green New Deal. The candidate who is chosen will have to appeal to a lot of different kinds of voters, not just the ones who agree with this writer. 

I'm not sold on Beto, and I have heard that he is actaully pretty conservative in his positions. On the other hand, I think this article is pretty narrow minded. 

And it's early. There is a LONG way to go before the Dems pick their candidate.

And just for good measure, here is a list of 28 accomplishments of the Obama presidency.

Thank u, next

With so many candidates in the ring or considering it, I have lost interest in some of the candidates who seems to have Achilles Heels of one kind or another:

Stacey Abrams - lost her election - needs to run and win a race for ANY other office

Amy Klobuchar - lots of strengths, but treating your staff like shit is kind of a deal breaker

Elizabeth Warren - such a passionate advocate for important issues but the way she handled that Native background issue really annoyed me

Kristen Gillebrand - love her consistent stands for women but hearing that she mishandled a sexual harrassment claim against her own staff is pretty disheartening, and the way she threw

Kamala Harris - not a deal breaker for me but her being a prosecutor raises objections in a year when criminal justice reform is a VERY important issue for many progressive voters

Cory Booker - I love him but he has very close ties to Big Pharma and that might be enough to tank his run, plus at least some people feel like we had a black guy already and we need to have other groups represented

Pete Buttegeig - so great on so many issues but it is not the Year of the Dorky White Guy; he's young, he can wait

Beto O'Roarke - I love him but I know progressives are super cautious about his many moderate stands on important issues

Julian Castro - I love him so much, but he has a major charisma deficit

Waiting for Biden to get in

Yet another thing making me break out in hives is this talk about how the Democrats can't win if they go too far to the left. OMG! We have this conversation every 4 years. And it's bullshit.

We have lost so many times with the safe candidate - Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry. We win when we have a young exciting candidate - Clinton, Obama - who inspire voters to come out.

Clinton and Obama were smart and in some ways wonky. But also charismatic. 

Hillary had policy positions out the wazoo. That had no relevance to her electability.

I am not a seasoned political analyst, I don't work at Five Thirty Eight. But I can see the excutiatingly obvious!

I don't want some wacko empty suit who can throw out a catchy phrase, but I want the guy who plays sax on Arsenio Hall or says "Yes, We Can" and they write a song about him. Not a snooze! Not an idiot, but someone with a bit of wow factor. 

50 arrested in scheme to get students into elite colleges.

This story is so depressing, especially seeing Felicity Huffman among those arrested. However, the silver lining is, just like with the Manafort sentencing, we finally pull back the curtain and see VERY CLEARLY exactly what privilege does for rich white people in America.

Frank Bruni wrote a whole book about this . . .

Bribes to Get Into Yale and Stanford? What Else Is New?

A new college admissions scandal is just the latest proof of a grossly uneven playing field.

By Frank Bruni

Opinion Columnist

One of the funniest stories I ever heard about the college admissions madness came from an independent consultant who was paid handsomely to guide families through it and increase the odds that Harvard or Yale said yes.

He recounted the involvement of one father and mother in their son’s personal (hah!) essay, which they didn’t trust him to ace himself. They drafted it, focusing of course on the hardship that he had overcome. But when they showed it to him, he spotted a minor problem. What they’d described — his mom’s difficult pregnancy, a sequence of visits to medical specialists, so much fear, so much suspense — predated his arrival in this world. Poignant as it was, he could take zero credit for it.

On Tuesday, the Justice Department announced the indictments of dozens of wealthy parents, including the Emmy-winning actress Felicity Huffman, for employing various forms of bribery and fraud to get their kids into highly selective schools. Some of them allegedly paid college coaches, including at Yale and Stanford, to lie and say that their children were special recruits for sports that the kids didn’t even play. Others allegedly paid exam administrators to let someone smarter take tests for their children. Millions of dollars changed hands.

It’s a galling exposé of widespread cheating by families who are already well-to-do and well connected, but it’s not really a surprising one. Anyone who knows anything about the cutthroat competition for precious spots at top-tier schools realizes how ugly and unfair it can be: how many corners are cut, how many schemes are hatched, how big a role money plays, how many advantages privilege can buy.

True Detective

I haven't finished Season 3 yet, but I want to remember this commentary:

https://www.vulture.com/2019/02/true-detective-season-3-twin-peaks-murder-mystery.html

Wayne Hays, Amelia Hays, and Roland West may well be the truest detectives we’ve met yet. But from Agent Dale Cooper on down, not even the best investigators have ever truly seen an open-and-shut case, one they could comfortably solve and file away forever. The forces that made life so hard for the Purcells and the people around them, that empowered their community’s worst elements and discarded otherwise decent people like corpses at a crime scene, will be there even if Will and Julie’s attackers are taken down once and for all. Who killed Laura Palmer? was the start of a discussion about what we do in the face of endemic pain and injustice, not the end of it. If True Detective season three wraps up with the same strengths it has displayed so far, it will ask a similar question, and offer just as challenging an answer.

Also this:

https://www.vulture.com/2016/05/true-detective-season-two-defense.html

Atlantic magazine analysis of political openmindedness

Jefferson County, and Watertown, NY comes out on top of their assessment. Weird.

The Geography of Partisan Prejudice

A guide to the most—and least—politically open-minded counties in America

AMANDA RIPLEY, REKHA TENJARLA, ANGELA Y. HE

Trump support is so scary

Post on FB from Lynn Greer:

OK, seriously, most of you know I am a conservative. I use to post a lot of political posts. But, I came to realize that those that disagree with me have their own path and we may or may not meet up. However, I have to say this.... I was a Democrat. I walked away when I knew that the Clinton’s were criminals. I held my nose as I voted against Hillary. Then I watched as the MSM trashed Trump. Every thing he did was twisted in the news. I wasn’t a Trump supporter until I saw how the corrupt Democrats spent millions trying to bring him down! They lost the election and spent our $ to bring Trump down. Evidence proved that Hillary colluded with the Russians. But, that didn’t matter.. must bring Trump down!! I am sick of my tax dollars going to this! I have tried to stay quiet. But, if you believe this type of investigation is OK then I beg you to educate yourself!! This is not OK!! Trump is our president and he is doing a damn good job!

I went from plugging my nose and voting for him to believing he is the best President ever! Open your eyes. Stop believing the MSM. Both parties are working against Trump! That’s because both parties are corrupt!!

I’m so sick and tired of the Democrats and their bull shit. I literally get nauseous watching the news.... I don’t care what channel! It use to be a difference off opinion. Now it is right vs evil!

Her friend Giselle:

I agree 100%. At first I did not want Donald Trump to be President, but as I watched how evil and corrupt the left is, and saw how they would viciously go after everything that he does, and how he exposed this web of evil corruption in our country, from politicians, the media, Hollywood elites and so on, I can only be grateful for what an amazing man he is. We would never have known all of what he has exposed, and I don’t believe there is any other man who is strong enough and bold enough to be able to take them all on. I love my President!

Her friend James:

Lynn, you are on the money 100%. I shudder as I think of the garbage going on around us. Trump should be hailed as one if the greatest presidents we've ever had. But instead they make him a racist, misogynist, dangerous tyrant. His only crime was he won against the anointed successor to their lord and savior Obama. His only sin was carrying through on the empty promises they have made for decades. America is stronger, and safer, better off with Trump, and they just can't stand it. I will vote for him in 2020, and will always support him.

MY REPLY:

There was plenty of negative coverage of Obama, especially in the conservative media; not just Fox News, but all the outlets, print and electronic. The conservative media spent 8 years saying Obama was not legitimately the president and that everything he did was ruining America. He was called a tyrant and dictator. I just don't see the difference between then and now. Go ahead, call me names. Dismiss me as a socialist, an idiot, a libtard. I'm used to it.